Madras High Court quashes FIR against five men booked for raising slogans against PM Modi

The Madras High Court recently quashed criminal cases against five men who were booked for allegedly having raised slogans against Prime Minister Narendra Modi in protest against the nationwide demonetisation drive in 2016 [Jegan @ Ellamaran & Ors. v State represented by Inspector of Police]..Justice N Satish Kumar, in an order passed on August 25, observed that the men had merely raised slogans and had not resorted to any violence or obstructed any public servants from discharging their official duties, as alleged in the FIR."Considering the above, this Court is of the view that mere launching of FIR by the prosecution itself is not sufficient to reach to the conclusion that offences are made out and the materials collected by the prosecution do not support for proving the case and continuing the prosecution on shaky or without any materials is clear abuse of process of law," the Court said in its order..The petitioners were booked by the Chennai police for having participated in a protest gathering on the evening of November 20, 2016, near the Nungambakkam area in the city.The FIR against them alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 143 (unlawful assembly), 188 (disobeying order duly promulgated by public servant), and 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of duty) of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 7(1)a of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. They approached the High Court seeking to quash the FIR, arguing that the offences alleged against them would not stand even if the entire prosecution case is taken at face value..Noting that there existed no prima facie material to show such offences had been committed, the Court concurred with the petitioners. "Even as per the FIR, it is not the case of the defacto complainant that the petitioners along with other accused have unlawfully assembled and used force or violence and hence, offences under sections 143 of IPC is not attracted. Further it is not the case of the prosecution that the accused have used criminal force to deter public servant from discharging his official duty to attract the offence under section 353 of IPC and section 7(1)(a) of Criminal Law Amendment Act," the Court observed.It also referred to Supreme Court precedents in which it was held that there was no reason to subject one to trial if no prima facie material to show an offence had been committed, existed.Accordingly, the Court quashed the proceedings against the petitioners..[Read Order]